HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

#24 | New York Rangers vs. New York Islanders | Mar 7 | 7 PM | L 2-1 OT

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-08-2013, 04:25 PM
  #626
redbull
BeLIeve in miracles!
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin27NYI View Post
Negatives are screwing me up, is he saying JT is the best?
yes.

...

but that is the way Howie told the story, could have been clearer without the negatives I suppose.

either way, JT rocks!

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2013, 04:42 PM
  #627
JTROCKS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by isles31 View Post
2/3 of that line played their balls off. JT was great last night and I honestly think it was Boyes best game. No points, but their presence was felt.
Yes, but his comment was that they "played great"--- he later said that they "were exceptional"--- You cant use those accolades when they didnt get a point-

If you say they played well, thats a different story---

JTROCKS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2013, 05:06 PM
  #628
StumpNYI
Registered User
 
StumpNYI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin27NYI View Post
Negatives are screwing me up, is he saying JT is the best?
Glad someone else asked. Had no idea what the hell that meant.

StumpNYI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-09-2013, 12:17 AM
  #629
iLandHer
Registered User
 
iLandHer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchy22 View Post
It doesn't matter if I combine them or average the minuses, it's the same point which should be obvious. The line is poor at 5-on-5 hockey. They've only proven to be effective against some of the smaller lineups in the league. I'm not a guy who focuses on stats, except the stats here are symptoms of the problem. I promise you I'm coming from a logical place here and not with some misguided obsession. Your second response to the other poster in the same post also shows you trying to change JT's linemates or put Bailey with someone else, which kind of makes me wonder how the two arguments can be in the same post.

Our problem with the first line is that we're often getting opposing coaches matching up their first line against ours. When they're not, it's because they have a checking line and/or defense that can physically overpower our first line. Even worse, they may have a lesser line that can match up against us. Our 2nd line is built like ****, with Nielsen as center who is afraid of the front of the net. Boyes and Moulson aren't afraid of the front of the net. It makes a lot more sense to move things around because of this.

The problem with the first line is compounded by the fact that the rest of our lines other than our 4th line (which was broken up for part of tonight to play Boulton in this game for no reason) are built like someone doesn't pay any attention to their on-ice performance. The line combos tonight were especially poor.

Martin can dislodge players from the puck. Martin is serviceable defensively. Martin actually has a decent release on his shot. Martin played with Stamkos in Juniors and would be playing the same exact kind of role here.

Grabner is quick. I'm pretty sure most people have noticed this. Whether he flubs enough breakaways or not, Grabner is a guy who can pace for 25-30 goals. In a regular season, I'd be fine with 25-30 from Grabner, 15-20 from Martin and 40-ish for JT. They'd do that while being better in all three zones. Let Moulson and JT rejoin on the power play.

Secondary scoring isn't going to give JT more favorable matchups. The only way JT sees more favorable matchups is when our coach knows what he's doing at home, or if we got a JT-esque player to play on another line. What we need are lines that are more balanced at 5-on-5. Our special teams have been good enough to be a playoff team. We're 8th in the league in Goals For right now. We're 2nd to last in Goals Against. We can afford to spread the talent around the lineup in a way that actually makes the team more formidable at ES hockey.

,
Mitch
My emphasis on changing the top line and putting Bailey on it isn't to benefit Tavares as much as it is to benefit Bailey. He's no producing and I think he should be put in a spot where he'd excel and be able to produce. Tavares doesn't need Bailey, but Bailey needs someone to facilitate to and Okposo isn't it. I don't think Bailey needs to be with Tavares only, but he does need to be with someone good. Unfortunately the Isles don't have anybody else right now.

I agree with the line combinations being poor, but I disagree with your assessment of Martin. Having a quick release has gotten him how many goals in his career? It's not as if he doesn't have any opportunities, he just doesn't take advantage of them most of the time. Also, having played with Stamkos in juniors is nice but I don't think that's a fair assessment of what he would do in the NHL when being put in the same role. Juniors is filled with lesser talent and the players are capped on their age. In the NHL he'd be performing against the best in the world, including a lot of veterans that you simply don't have in juniors. I'm not saying he couldn't do it, I personally just don't think he would.

I'd be much happier with Martin going to the top line because he can battle. Gabner doesn't do much once he's in the offensive zone. So he's great for the breakouts and entries into the zone, but after that I don't see him doing much. I think his scoring would come from the same types of plays, so I don't see a need to move him to the top line.

Does Moulson produce as much if he's not on the top line? I'd say he doesn't, his production would reduce radically, especially since his ice time would also drop. You can't move him. I do agree that the lines need to be changed with an attempt to get more balanced scoring, but there are just glaring holes on the team and guys who either won't produce or can't produce without Tavares.

The fourth line is the best at cycling and controlling the puck in the opponents zone, but they don't have anyone to score. I'd be interested in doing a line with Cizikas and Bailey with possibly McDonald as a #2 line and dropping Nielsen down to the #3 with Grabner and someone else. I genuinely don't like Okposo and I don't like Reasoner at all and want him and Boulton to just go away. But if they are on this roster it's going to make it real difficult to get more balanced scoring and keep the lines alright defensively.

iLandHer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-09-2013, 01:11 AM
  #630
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriCycleDriveBy View Post
My emphasis on changing the top line and putting Bailey on it isn't to benefit Tavares as much as it is to benefit Bailey. He's no producing and I think he should be put in a spot where he'd excel and be able to produce. Tavares doesn't need Bailey, but Bailey needs someone to facilitate to and Okposo isn't it. I don't think Bailey needs to be with Tavares only, but he does need to be with someone good. Unfortunately the Isles don't have anybody else right now.

I agree with the line combinations being poor, but I disagree with your assessment of Martin. Having a quick release has gotten him how many goals in his career? It's not as if he doesn't have any opportunities, he just doesn't take advantage of them most of the time. Also, having played with Stamkos in juniors is nice but I don't think that's a fair assessment of what he would do in the NHL when being put in the same role. Juniors is filled with lesser talent and the players are capped on their age. In the NHL he'd be performing against the best in the world, including a lot of veterans that you simply don't have in juniors. I'm not saying he couldn't do it, I personally just don't think he would.

I'd be much happier with Martin going to the top line because he can battle. Gabner doesn't do much once he's in the offensive zone. So he's great for the breakouts and entries into the zone, but after that I don't see him doing much. I think his scoring would come from the same types of plays, so I don't see a need to move him to the top line.

Does Moulson produce as much if he's not on the top line? I'd say he doesn't, his production would reduce radically, especially since his ice time would also drop. You can't move him. I do agree that the lines need to be changed with an attempt to get more balanced scoring, but there are just glaring holes on the team and guys who either won't produce or can't produce without Tavares.

The fourth line is the best at cycling and controlling the puck in the opponents zone, but they don't have anyone to score. I'd be interested in doing a line with Cizikas and Bailey with possibly McDonald as a #2 line and dropping Nielsen down to the #3 with Grabner and someone else. I genuinely don't like Okposo and I don't like Reasoner at all and want him and Boulton to just go away. But if they are on this roster it's going to make it real difficult to get more balanced scoring and keep the lines alright defensively.
We agree on bad line combos and on there being glaring holes in the team. As others have also mentioned, we disagree about the 5-on-5 worthiness of our top line. Matt Moulson has a skill that transfers to any line, namely, he reacts quickly in tight to the goalie and finishes. Matt Moulson also takes smart routes, he's just sluggish to accelerate and is one of the sloppiest skaters on the team. Matt Moulson only gets anywhere due to effort, and his stamina isn't that great. Once he has to start and stop, it's game over. Matt Moulson also has the worst checking form on the team. I'd like to say, that I actually don't hate Matt Moulson. I like him. He is what he is. I actually have no worries whatsoever that he will still pot goals away from John Tavares as long as the puck finds its way to the net.

Okposo has been dogging the puck as of late. We can't discount the impressive month JT had last year, the only month he was a plus player, in which KO was his linemate. Maybe it was lightning in a bottle, but I think it shows more of what JT's lines have been missing than proving that Okposo is our top line answer.

The reason why I mentioned Stamkos and Juniors is simply because Martin was a player who played in a top line role with an elite talent and played well. Even after Stamkos left, Martin was able to pot some goals. I'm not blind on his shot, he has a good release. He's also willing to take punishment in front of the net. I'm not asking for him to drop in 30 goals, but right now Boyes is pacing for 17-18. PAP didn't exactly destroy the goal records on JT's right side. I want a more balanced line where a guy can actually retrieve the puck other than JT.

Is Pascal Dupuis the most talented player on the Pens? You can build a line where the sum is greater than its parts. That has always been the case. It's even more the case when you have an elite player who simply needs other players who enhance what that elite player can do or make up for the smallest of flaws in their game.

Grabner has greatly improved without the puck. He's stronger on his skates. He's disruptive and gets to loose pucks quicker than anyone on the team. He doesn't need to be the guy to carry on a line with JT. He needs to be a guy who can get to loose pucks. Whether he finishes on breakaways or not, Grabner does finish more than most other players on this team (even if it's purely a numbers game.)

I know I'm not the only guy who sees how many times JT's line gets bogged down in the defensive end, or how often one of JT's linemates is slow to get to a loose puck, or how little of a chance JT's linemates have at battling 1-on-1. KO can battle 1-on-1 or even 1-on-2 on the boards and that is why he had some success last year with JT. It's pretty obvious that KO's offense is inconsistent, but he's been more like the player we expect him to be of late. Bailey also has been battling out there. Both of those players are superior on the defensive size of the puck than Moulson or Boyes. JT can score the goals. JT can hold the puck. He just needs some help without the puck. Neither Moulson nor Boyes provide much other than a blocked lane or two from Moulson, and maybe a check every now and then from Boyes.

Cizikas, Bailey and McDonald is asking a lot of Casey Cizikas. You want to try Cizikas in a secondary scoring role, put him in between Boyes and Moulson. Casey goes hard to the net and gets back hard on the play. He's already solid enough on the draw as a young kid. His ability to score at the NHL level is yet to be determined. Bailey and Nielsen are both players that will give up the shot to pass even in a prime scoring area. Bailey has been better since he's been on the wing, but he's still pass-first. Nielsen just shies away from that area with the puck; he's more likely to go for a loose puck in a scrum than stay in the slot unless it's completely open.

We have a lot of playmakers and very few players that drive hard to the net. In fact, we have very few players that can drive hard to anywhere that actually have enough skill.

Matt Martin has more skill than many are allowing for. I'm not asking him to be a 1st line talent. I'm asking for him to protect JT, dislodge players from the puck, and play hard on the defensive size of things. He had 7 goals as a 3rd/4th liner. I don't think 15 goals is out of the question. I also don't think he'd drag any player down on this team by being on their line. The reason why I suggest Grabner-JT-Martin is that is literally adds elements that JT has never had on his line - a true physical presence, and a separate winger that can actually skate up the and down the ice and get to loose pucks. JT is the guy who will hold the puck the most. When he doesn't have it, he'll actually have guys who can get the puck back in different ways.

It's not a perfect line. It's just working with what we have. Like I mentioned, there's a ton of different combos I could see working better than what we have; that goes for throughout the lineup after we change the top line. The goal should be the get the whole line performing well, not simply improving an individual player's performance. If the line is working, then the players are all contributing to some degree. I think Bailey can do more, but the major flaw on that line is Nielsen since there is no presence in front of the net and not a single player who gets shots to the net enough. Put Jeff Carter between Bailey and KO and you'd have a second line. Nielsen is the opposite of what we need there.

You're welcome to agree to disagree; I can literally justify every combo I created and mention the relative strengths and weaknesses of each one. I can also type fast and barrage everyone with walls of text as I deem necessary. You've been playfully warned.

,
Mitch


Last edited by mitchy22: 03-09-2013 at 01:16 AM. Reason: brain farts, etc.
mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-09-2013, 01:24 AM
  #631
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,769
vCash: 500
Also, I think Matt Moulson being away from top pairings and larger lines would improve his 5-on-5 play. Yes, he might score less with reduced ice-time and being away from the team's best player, that's to be expected. However, Matt Moulson's ability to finish doesn't disappear. We have other players on this team who can get him the puck. What we're lacking on most lines is guys who can finish. JT and Moulson, then Grabner. That's pretty much the order of finish on this team - and people ***** about Grabner's finish all of the time because of the high quality chances he doesn't bury.

Matt Moulson will receive less 5-on-5 ice, but I'm not looking to get him away from the power play. Matt Moulson is very good as a stationary player in the offensive zone. If he gets 15 goals at ES and 10 on the power play while playing second line minutes, does that make us better or worse? Obviously, it depends on what happens with the other lines, specifically JT's line. We'll never know if we don't try it, but I'll tell you right now that JT's been the best defensive player on his line and has very little to work with in terms of getting the puck back from other teams. I'd love to get Evander Kane and Rick Nash to put on his line, but that **** ain't happening.

Teams goals FOR and AGAINST are the only things that matter. We're scoring plenty of goals right now, but we're letting up more than almost the entire league. Goal differential has consistently been the best measure of playoff and non-playoff teams as far as I'm concerned, and it's obviously directly related to winning hockey games. JT is a plus player when you include power play points in his totals, but one of the best players in the league should be plus at 5-on-5. It's not JT, and the defensive play he made in front of his own net against the Rags highlights what he can do. JT retrieving the puck after he loses it highlights what he can do. The problem is in what his linemates cannot do. The defense is iffy and lacking at the top and bottom, but I'll consistently argue that our 5-man units are more flawed because of our forward combinations of late.

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.